Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35241869›Full record

ArticleJournal of development economics2022

Financial access and women's role in household decisions: Empirical evidence from India's National Rural Livelihoods project.

Anjini Kochar, Closepet Nagabhushana, Ritwik Sarkar, Rohan Shah, Geeta Singh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of development economics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anjini KocharStanford University and International Initiative for Impact Evaluation, USA.
Closepet NagabhushanaVrutti Livelihood Impact Partners, India.
Ritwik SarkarInternational Initiative for Impact Evaluation, India.
Rohan ShahVrutti Livelihood Impact Partners, India.
Geeta SinghInternational Initiative for Impact Evaluation, India.

Funding

Gates Foundation INV-006839
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Government programs supporting self help groups (SHGs) generally target women on the assumption that doing so enhances women's decision-making. The empirical evidence, however, is mixed. We advance and test one explanation: the loan amounts offered by most SHGs may be too small to impact women. Our analysis is based on SHGs developed under India's National Rural Livelihoods Mission, a program that supported both small loans from internal savings and larger loans through Community Investment Funds (CIFs). Exploiting variation in their phasing and amount, we document a large effect of CIFs on women's decision-making and on intra-household allocations.

Indexed as

Loan sizeSelf help groupsWomen's decision-making

Identifiers

PMID35241869
PMCPMC8856924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.